IPCC EXPOSED

Donna Laframboise has researched the workings of the IPCC for the last two years and the book The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the World's Top Climate Expert is the result of her labours.

“Blooming brilliant. Devastating” - Matt Ridley, author of The Rational Optimist

“...shines a hard light on the rotten heart of the IPCC” - Richard Tol, Professor of the Economics of Climate Change and convening lead author of the IPCC

“...you need to read this book. Its implications are far-reaching and the need to begin acting on them is urgent.” - Ross McKitrick, Professor of Economics, University of Guelph.

And courtesy of the website, Australian Climate Madness study the flow chart in the pdf file for an understanding of the Climate Alarmism Machine.

CARBON TAX: BILLIONS WILL BE WASTED

SO it's done. But it's hardly a shining achievement. Even the government's hope is that by the next election most voters will have forgotten it. And who knows, like an unpleasant visit to the dentist, the climate change legislation may fade with time. But it will still be the most expensive dentist's visit in our history says Henry Ergas in The Australian.

HAS THE U.K. GOVT SEEN THE LIGHT ON GREEN ENERGY COSTS?

Previous unequivocal support for green energy schemes by the Conservative government of David Cameron may be coming to an end.

At the recent Tory conference, Chancellor George Osborne attacked green energy laws apparently reflecting concerns within the government that green energy costs had become a vote-loser.

Sean Poulter from the Daily Mail reports that "The shift to green energy is being driven by the EU and commitments made by both the last Labour government and the Coalition, based on the support of Energy and Climate Change Secretary Chris Huhne."

Some however see these shifts as driving up to one in four Britons into fuel poverty.

Of course in Australia we will soon have a brand new Clean Energy Future bureaucracy operating on a 'good' policy platform without any political interference, so none of these excesses will ever happen in the clever country.  Will they?

CARBON TAX PASSED BY PARLIAMENT, OPPOSED BY THE PEOPLE

The Clean Energy Future legislation [a carbon dioxide tax] passed the lower house of parliament today, 74-72.  The vote was the culmination of years of rancorous debate that permeated throughout the whole community.

The debate on the need for the tax, its benefits and the science that informed the government's view have inflamed passions in the community.

Claims of uninformed opinion from commentators who are not climate scientists, dodgy science funded by advocacy groups, hockey stick tricks, Climategate, precious little global warming and a government intent on accepting only one view and manipulating the process to achieve that end, have poured fuel onto the flames of dissent.

This manipulation of the debate is epitomised by the conduct of the recent inquiry into the Clean Energy Future legislation. 

The public were given only 7 days to make submissions.  Nevertheless 4500 citizens and organisations submitted their views to the parliamentary inquiry.  The committee determined that 98% of those submissions were 'correspondence' and therefore would not be considered or published.

This reflects the lack of integrity in the conduct of the debate and discussion on climate issues over the last few years.  It is of little surprise the majority of the Australian population are opposed to the legislation and the tax.

Retired geologist and engineer Peter Lang outlines his experience of having his submission to the inquiry denied consideration.

ANSWERS ON 4 CLIMATE QUESTIONS THE GOVT SHOULD CONSIDER

Australian Environment Foundation members, Professors Peter Ridd and Bob Carter along with Emeritus Professor Garth Paltridge appeared in a panel session on The Bolt Report to answer four important questions on the climate.

Their conclusions to the questions are very different to the government's.

10 KEY TESTS FOR THE CARBON TAX BILLS

Viv Forbes, chairman of the Carbon Sense Coalition lists 10 criteria to test the carbon tax legislation before parliament this week.

1.    Is there any evidence of unusual or dangerous global warming?
NO.
Therefore we should reject the carbon tax bills.

2.    If we do nothing will it cause runaway global warming?
NO.
Therefore we should reject the carbon tax bills.

3.    Is there an unusual or dangerous amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere?
NO.
Therefore we should reject the carbon tax bills.

4.    Does carbon dioxide control global temperatures?
NO.
Therefore we should reject the carbon tax bills.

5.    Can human action control the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere?
NO.
Therefore we should reject the carbon tax bills.

6.    Is extra carbon dioxide a pollutant in the atmosphere, or a danger to life on earth?
NO.
Therefore we should reject the carbon tax bills.

7.    Will our tax on carbon dioxide have any effect on world production of carbon dioxide or on global climate?
NO.
Therefore we should reject the carbon tax bills.

8.    Will the big economies in our region such as USA, Japan, China and India follow us in taxing and rationing carbon fuels?
NO.
Therefore we should reject the carbon tax bills.

9.    Will our major competitors such as Indonesia, Brazil, Canada and South Africa follow us in taxing carbon dioxide?
NO.
Therefore we should reject the carbon tax bills.

10.    Are the benefits of taxing carbon dioxide likely to exceed the costs in job losses, wasted savings, destruction of asset values and increased costs for electricity, transport, food and construction materials?
NO.

The Carbon Tax Bills have failed the Ten Point Test and thus should be rejected.